The difference in injuries compared the rest of baseball is pretty amazing.

I also thought that was a great article. In this case, stats support what many of us concluded based on observation; since the 2005 season the Sox get solid starting pitching that generally stays healthy. Sabermetric predictions don't factor this into formulae, and we fans may tend to overrate our pitching, which can account for the differences between BP projections and our own prognostications.

__________________The universe is the practical joke of the General at the expense of the Particular, quoth Frater Perdurabo, and laughed. The disciples nearest him wept, seeing the Universal Sorrow. Others laughed, seeing the Universal Joke. Others wept. Others laughed. Others wept because they couldn't see the Joke, and others laughed lest they should be thought not to see the Joke. But though FRATER laughed openly, he wept secretly; and really he neither laughed nor wept. Nor did he mean what he said.

I also thought that was a great article. In this case, stats support what many of us concluded based on observation; since the 2005 season the Sox get solid starting pitching that generally stays healthy. Sabermetric predictions don't factor this into formulae, and we fans may tend to overrate our pitching, which can account for the differences between BP projections and our own prognostications.

I thought it was a great article as well. It illuminated several points that add to both sides of the debate.

__________________"I have the ultimate respect for White Sox fans. They were as miserable as the Cubs and Red Sox fans ever were but always had the good decency to keep it to themselves. And when they finally won the World Series, they celebrated without annoying every other fan in the country." Jim Caple, ESPN (January 12, 2011)

"We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the (bleeding) obvious is the first duty of intelligent men." — George Orwell

I don't see how it's possible to read that as anything other than a complete ass kicking of the anti-BP crowd, but whatevs

Well, perhaps because the writer clearly states why BP has been very consistently wrong about the Sox. It pretty nicely illustrates why a team like the Sox (while unique in the league) does certain things that expose flaws in the system. It also makes clear why Sox fans have the most reason of any fans in the league to be critical of BP.

Well, perhaps because the writer clearly states why BP has been very consistently wrong about the Sox. It pretty nicely illustrates why a team like the Sox (while unique in the league) does certain things that expose flaws in the system. It also makes clear why Sox fans have the most reason of any fans in the league to be critical of BP.

All you picked out of that was the surface argument?

After random chance, we've only outperformed their model by 5 games/year. It's really not all THAT significant. Outperforming their model by 5 games this year would make us .500. Clearly not all that significant.

After random chance, we've only outperformed their model by 5 games/year. It's really not all THAT significant. Outperforming their model by 5 games this year would make us .500. Clearly not all that significant.

Considering you have been saying the Tigers are a threat for 116 wins, wouldn't you say their PECOTA projection of 92 is a bit off? How are you defending a system you personally think is 24 games off?

I personally like BP, but don't take these projections too seriously. If you go back, some are accurate, others are not. They get a couple playoff teams right. A couple of last place teams wind up in the post season. People should just take them for what they are.

I don't see how it's possible to read that as anything other than a complete ass kicking of the anti-BP crowd, but whatevs

Please read below.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sullythered

Well, perhaps because the writer clearly states why BP has been very consistently wrong about the Sox. It pretty nicely illustrates why a team like the Sox (while unique in the league) does certain things that expose flaws in the system. It also makes clear why Sox fans have the most reason of any fans in the league to be critical of BP.

Exactly. If anything, it is the opposite of a "complete ass kicking of the anti-BP crowd" (which, by the way, consists of only a few of those who ridicule BP's projections in this context, not necessarily BP as a whole).

Considering you have been saying the Tigers are a threat for 116 wins, wouldn't you say their PECOTA projection of 92 is a bit off? How are you defending a system you personally think is 24 games off?

I personally like BP, but don't take these projections too seriously. If you go back, some are accurate, others are not. They get a couple playoff teams right. A couple of last place teams wind up in the post season. People should just take them for what they are.

Oh for the love of God. I don't think the Tigers are going to win 116 games. But they CAN win that many. I do feel 92 is awfully low. But the idea is there. I'm less concerned with the totals than I am where they are in relation to other teams. For instance, they have the Tigers 15 games better than us. I think that's pretty fair.

I don't see how it's possible to read that as anything other than a complete ass kicking of the anti-BP crowd, but whatevs

No it's a defense of Pecota projections if done correctly. BP's model obviously doesn't factor in enough variables, so it's not a defense of BP but a simple statement that given enough variables it might be possible to make more accurate projections team by team.

__________________Riding shotgun on the Sox bandwagon since before there was an Internet...

No it's a defense of Pecota projections if done correctly. BP's model obviously doesn't factor in enough variables, so it's not a defense of BP but a simple statement that given enough variables it might be possible to make more accurate projections team by team.

Oh for the love of God. I don't think the Tigers are going to win 116 games. But they CAN win that many. I do feel 92 is awfully low. But the idea is there. I'm less concerned with the totals than I am where they are in relation to other teams. For instance, they have the Tigers 15 games better than us. I think that's pretty fair.

So if you think 92 is low for the Tigers and say 15 games is fair, you do admit the 77 for the Sox is low, and if 15 games is fair, if the Tigers could win 116, I believe you said they even could win more, it's not so crazy to think the Sox could win 101, correct?

So if you think 92 is low for the Tigers and say 15 games is fair, you do admit the 77 for the Sox is low, and if 15 games is fair, if the Tigers could win 116, I believe you said they even could win more, it's not so crazy to think the Sox could win 101, correct?

So if you think 92 is low for the Tigers and say 15 games is fair, you do admit the 77 for the Sox is low, and if 15 games is fair, if the Tigers could win 116, I believe you said they even could win more, it's not so crazy to think the Sox could win 101, correct?

No. I think it's more likely we win 60 than 100. Not that either is likely.

After random chance, we've only outperformed their model by 5 games/year. It's really not all THAT significant. Outperforming their model by 5 games this year would make us .500. Clearly not all that significant.

The writer himself says that BP has been particularly and significantly wrong when it comes to the White Sox. He then proceeds to tell us why. The reasons given are exactly why whole team projections are really just for fun, and not very useful, as opposed to specific player projections. There are too many variables to project an entire team's success as anything other than a fun little exercise. Meaningless, and not useful to anyone. Not even gamblers, really.